We received the following article from Navi Singh and felt it pretty relevant to expanding our knowledge horizons. Please leave comments below.

ALL SEXUALITY IS FORBIDDEN IN SIKHISM – NOT JUST HOMOSEXUALITY!

The issue of homosexuality and Sikhism is often a topic of vigorous contention. While the more conservative-minded, reactionary elements within the Sikh community express their disgust towards homosexuality, Sikh scriptures are decidedly neutral on the matter as they do not entail explicit references either condemning it or condoning it (unlike their Abrahamic counterparts). The leading Jathedar of the Akal Takht, once beseeched Sikhs to oppose government proposals to legalise gay marriage in Canada, proclaiming it was their religious duty to do so. For those of you that don’t know, the Akal-Takht is situated within the Harimandir Sahib complex and is usually considered to represent the temporal authority of all Sikhs worldwide. I do not regard the individuals currently presiding over the Akal-Takht as my temporal authority, because I believe the institution has become overly-politicised and is under the hegemonic influence of the Indian authorities.

Correspondingly, I have been asked by many what I consider to be the Sikh position on homosexuality. Through this article I will briefly elaborate upon my personal interpretation of the religious perspective of the matter. Is homosexual activity forbidden in Sikhism? My answer would be yes – only because sexuality is prohibited as a whole. Does Sikhism differentiate between homosexuality and heterosexuality? My answer would be an unequivocal no. Do I regard homosexuals as insufferable freaks of nature? Is being gay or lesbian an abomination? No, it’s an entirely normal phenomenon that occurs in nature.

It is my understanding that any type of sexuality, irrespective of orientation, is regarded as sinful and lustful (kaam). Therefore, all sexual inclinations are equally discouraged and heterosexuality is prohibited to exactly the same degree as homosexuality. The only reason a conventional “straight” marriage is encouraged is for utilitarian purposes of procreation and cultivating family-life, which is strongly promoted in Sikhism. Asides from reproductive purposes, it is my understanding that the nature of the relationship should be strictly platonic.

There is contentious debate surrounding whether being attracted to someone of the same gender is a biological or environmental characteristic. In addition to the fact that homosexual behaviour is prevalent throughout the natural world, the evidence strongly suggests that it is primarily an innate disposition combined should with environmental and social factors – in the same way that being attracted to someone of the opposite gender is an innate disposition. Consequently, I believe that Sikhs should endeavour to suppress all these sensual instincts and feelings of attraction wherever possible, regardless of the orientation. This is the salient point here, that I feel many have failed to grasp.

Ultimately, I do believe it is possible to be “gay” and “Sikh” – the same way I believe it is possible to be “straight” and “Sikh”. While this may stand in apparent contradiction to my aforementioned assertion that homosexuality is indeed forbidden in Sikhism, I will now proceed to elucidate upon why I think this way. I believe it is possible to be “gay” and “Sikh” because nobody is perfect, we’re all human, homosexuals are probably (according to scientific evidence) born that way and interpretations on what exactly constitutes a “Sikh” may differ.

I therefore vehemently oppose discrimination directed towards individuals who choose to identify themselves as “gay” and “Sikh”. The two are not wholly irreconcilable, mutually-exclusive concepts.It’s no more a self-contradictory oxymoron than say, an “alcohol-drinking” or “tobacco-smoking” Sikh.

With regards to whether it is incumbent on Sikhs to oppose the legalisation of gay marriage, I can find no scriptural justification for this assertion, even for Sikhs who personally believe that homosexuality is prohibited within their own religion. In my opinion, fighting for freedom and standing up for the oppressed – irrespective of your own individual standing – is one of the more fundamental ethical imperatives in Sikhism. I don’t see how supporting gay marriage, in this instance, constitutes a compromise of one’s faith – particularly when taking into consideration the examples from Sikh history that indicate that we are culturally inclined to protect those who are the most persecuted and demonised in society.

The resultant ostracism and hostility that homosexual Sikhs may encounter from within their own communities and social circles does not, in my opinion, originate from a holistic understanding of Sikhism, which promotes tolerance and egalitarianism for all humanity. On the contrary, anti-LGBT sentiment is primarily indicative of traditional conservative Punjabi culture, which is decidedly patriarchal and overly masculined. Sikhism is a unique religion, in that it simultaneously discourages promiscuity and celibacy; therefore prompting many prominent Sikh figures to issue their own pronouncements on the topic.

Finally, the Sikh community needs to acknowledge the fact that gay or lesbian individuals aren’t capricious people who just choose their own sexuality according to their whims and desires, but rather they are susceptible to exactly the same passions and natural tendencies as all of us. Moreover, a gay Sikh is not automatically more sinful or evil than a straight Sikh – anyone who thinks this way has, in my view, completely misunderstood the Sikh position on such matters.

We at Sarbat are delighted that the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act recognises our right to marry on equal terms with heterosexual couples. It is an important first step in engaging with our community on the issue of homosexuality and same sex marriage.

Advisory group ‘Sikhs in England’ have written to Gurudwaras urging them to halt all marriages, due to legalisation of same sex marriage in England and Wales. This would be an unprecedented move.

Although their views are unlikely to be acted upon by Gurudwaras, it is disappointing to see a group which claims to be acting in the interests of Sikhs, only causing harm.

It is a fact that there are many gay Sikhs and they, quite rightly, want to live a life that emulates Sikh principles. Being gay is not an obstacle to this. It never has been, and we see no reason why it should.

Sikhism is an all-encompassing religion, with the principle of equality at its very heart.

It does not speak against homosexuality, and there is nothing in the Holy Scriptures that states that marriage must be between a man and a woman.

Furthermore, discriminating against people or groups, including the gay community, would be going against Sikh teachings. Any form of prejudice is not tolerated in Sikhism. Sadly, it appears that this fundamental principle of our religion is being ignored by a minority of individuals, to the detriment of our religion. We consider ourselves to be every much as part of the Sikh community as we do of the LGBT community.

It is saddening to see a few fringe groups within the Sikh community that feel threatened enough to issue completely unwarranted statements, such as the one from ‘Sikhs in England’. It is knee-jerk response without any foundation.

Furthermore, it should be noted that, until now, ‘Sikhs in England’ have never voiced their opinion on any Sikh related matters. It is also significant that the spokesperson for ‘Sikhs in England’ is also involved in the Sikh Chaplaincy Trust – which was founded and spearheaded by Lord Singh, a vocal critic of same sex marriage. In this context, the views expressed by ‘Sikhs in England’, can only be seen to be wholly biased.

We invite ‘Sikhs in England’ to engage in dialogue with us, so that we can discuss their concerns and allay their fears.

Open Letter to The Rt Hon David Cameron, MP, Prime Minister and Lord Singh of Wimbledon

Dear Mr Cameron,

Earlier this week, Lord Singh of Wimbledon made a number of comments in respect of same-sex marriages on the Today Programme on Radio 4. Lord Singh described the the consultation for same-sex marriages as being a “sideways assault on religion”, and he described that as being the view held by Sikhs generally. He also described the call for same-sex marriages as being an attempt by “a vocal secular minority to attack religion”.

We at Sarbat do not agree with those comments. Sarbat is the only social and support group for LGBT Sikhs in the UK, and we are also the one-stop resource for LGBT Sikhs around the world via our website www.sarbat.net. We are first and foremost Sikh and our sexuality is secondary to our Sikh identity, just as the sexuality of heterosexual Sikhs is secondary to their Sikh identity. Some of us are baptised Sikhs within the Khalsa tradition, whilst others are sehajdhari Sikhs, i.e. those Sikhs who have decided not to keep long hair. In other words, our membership is totally representative of the Sikh faith. The only things that set us apart from our heterosexual Sikh brothers and sister is our sexuality. We hold our beliefs truly and sincerely, and we do not see any reason why being gay should be a barrier to being Sikh or to being allowed to marry.

Sarbat was founded in 2007 as a means of promoting the rights of LGBT Sikhs in Britain and globally. We have published a leaflet about the compatibility of same-sex marriages within a Sikh context (http://sarbat.net/sikhism_and_same_sex_relationships.pdf), and we are fully supportive of the proposal for introducing same-sex marriages in England and Wales. We are also a pragmatic organisation. We are not asking for Parliament to force same-sex marriages to be sanctified in Sikh places of worship (Gurdwaras) as that would be a matter for the Sikh faith itself. What we are asking for is true equality in recognising our right to marriage.

The name ‘Sarbat’ is taken from the final couplet in the Ardas or the Sikh congregational prayer of supplication, where Sikhs pray for the happiness and goodwill of the whole of mankind. LGBT Sikhs form part of that mankind for whom prayers are given on a daily basis, and we do not consider ourself to be distinct from the Sikh faith solely because of our sexuality.

Sarbat trusts and believes that the Government and Parliament as a whole will pay heed to our views on this controversial topic and will take on board that the Sikh faith is not how Lord Singh has sought to portray it in his comments on Radio 4.

Lord Singh went on to say that he would be willing to bless “any other sort of relationship” as long as it is not a same-sex marriage. In that case, we call on Lord Singh to attend a civil partnership and give a Sikh blessing to it afterwards. We also call upon Lord Singh to tell us what the ‘Sikh’ blessing equivalent for a civil partnership would take, and we very much look forward to seeing Lord Singh march at World Pride on 7th July 2012 alongside our gay men and women members under the Sarbat banner.

The British Government is undertaking a consultation in respect of the proposal to introduce same-sex marriage to England and Wales. The consultation period will last until 14th June 2012.

Sarbat is wholeheartedly in support of the proposal for true equality for gay men and women on the issue of marriage, and we have contributed our voice to the debate by participating in the consultation.

In January 2005, the Jathedar (Head Priest) of the Akal Takht in Amritsar issued an edict denouncing same-sex marriages and urging the worldwide Sikh community not to allow such marriages to take place at any Gurdwara. Same-sex relationships were condemned as being anti-Sikh, with the concept of same-sex marriages originating “from sick minds” and being “anti-human”.[1] At the same time, the Canadian Prime Minister cancelled a visit to Amritsar and the Golden Temple because of his belief that the Sikh clergy in Punjab were attempting to control Canadian politics. How did a political issue in Canada lead to the issuing of an edict by a religious institution halfway across the world? Why did that religious institution feel the need to issue such an edict in the first place? And what is the impact of that edict upon the worldwide Sikh community?

The Akal Takht, or the ‘Seat of the Immortal One’, was established at the time of the 6th Sikh Guru (Guru Hargobind Ji) as the primary seat of temporal authority from where ‘hukamnamas’ or edicts were issued providing guidance to the Sikh community as a whole. The Jathedar of the Akal Takht is meant to be a spiritual leader without control or influence from any outside, politically motivated sources[2], although since the 1920s the position has been one appointed by the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabhandak Committee (SGPC), the committee responsible for the management of Gurdwaras in Punjab and other north Indian states. The SGPC itself is an organisation elected by the Sikhs of northern India.

The Sikh marriage was institutionalised in 1909 by the Anand Marriage Act of India. Prior to that time, although the Sikh marriage hymns form part of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib (the Sikh Holy Scriptures), marriages of Sikh couples usually followed the Hindu model of marriage, namely the circumambulation of fire, as that was the only legally recognised form of marriage for Sikhism in India at that time. The Sikh marriage hymns, or Lavaan, were composed by the 4th Sikh Guru (Guru Ram Das Ji) and they are non-gender specific. The only references made to gender are those of God as the bridegroom and the human souls of those who are entering into the marriage as the bride.[3] Marriage is deemed to be the blending of the human soul with God, and not specifically marriage between a man and a woman. In that respect, there is nothing that would prevent a same-sex marriage taking place within the context of Sikhism.

It appears that this fear was paramount on the minds of the Jathedar of the Akal Takht and the SGPC when the edict regarding same-sex marriages was given. If same-sex marriage were not possible within the Sikh religion, then it would not have been necessary to issue such an edict in the first place.

The Canadian connection to the edict stems from the fact that it is home to one of the largest Sikh communities outside of India. Sikhs have been living in Canada for over 100 years now, with almost 300,000 Sikhs living in Canada as of the 2001 census[4], and in January 2005, there were 6 members of the Canadian Parliament who were Sikh. Towards the end of 2004, the proposed legislation regarding same-sex marriages was being debated in the Canadian Parliament. It was a subject which had aroused the interest of the general public, and various inter-related issues were being discussed, such as whether such marriages would have to take place in religious places of worship.

Some member of the Sikh community in Canada were concerned that they may have to allow gay marriages to take place in gurdwaras, and so they lobbied the SGPC and the Jathedar of the Akal Takht as to guidance on this subject. Unfortunately, no debates or discussions took place on the legitimacy of same-sex marriages within Sikhism, and this resulted in the issuing of the edict. It should be noted here that the eventual Civil Marriage Act which made same-sex marriages legal in Canada did not apply to religious places of worship where same-sex marriage was contrary to that religion’s beliefs.[5]

The Jathedar of the Akal Takht and the SGPC also declared that the Sikh Members of Parliament in Canada should vote against the proposed legislation as it was an issue which affected the Sikh community and which should be seen to be more important than petty politics.[6] Following this pronouncement from the Akal Takht, the Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin cancelled his visit to Amritsar, and although he never gave official reasons as to why he cancelled at such short notice, some commentators believed that it was directly related to the edict.[7]

To put the issue of Indian-influenced attitudes to homosexuality into context, it has to be noted that homosexuality is illegal in India under the Penal Code introduced by the British Raj in the Victorian era[8]. To that extent the edict should, in my opinion, be viewed as a product of its environment. It is an order given by a religious institution in northern India upon a subject matter deemed illegal and immoral in that conservative country in order to provide guidance as sought by a small number of Sikhs in a liberal Western country.

The question as to the impact that the edict should have on the worldwide Sikh community is a complex one given the apparent authority vested within the Jathedar. The Jathedar of the Akal Takht has issued edicts in the past which have not been recognised or accepted by Sikh communities in other countries and sometimes even those within India itself. The most notable recent issues which have caused rifts within the Sikh diaspora are those concerning the use of tables and chairs in langar halls (open kitchen) and the Nanakshahi calendar.

Many gurdwaras in the West have chosen to ignore the edict issued in 1998 which prohibited the use of tables and chairs when partaking in langar (the free communal meal served in gurdwaras), and continue to use them due to their Western sensibilities.[9] The Nanakshahi calendar, the new Sikh calendar implemented by the SGPC in 2003, has divided Sikhs around the world who believe that the Sikh calendar should remain unchanged as it has done since the time of the living Gurus and follow the northern Indian Bikrami calendar as used by the Hindus. In fact, the issue has divided Sikhs in India itself, with some important Sikh communities outside of Punjab continuing to use the old calendar and refusing to adopt the new calendar.[10]

Therefore, it should be noted that the edicts issued by the Jathedar of the Akal Takht are not always followed by the Sikh communities outside of northern India, and that there is a precedent which suggests that the Jathedar of the Akal Takht and the SGPC do not have the authority which they believe or hope they hold over the worldwide Sikh community.

There is also a precedent for personal interpretation of the Guru Granth Sahib on issues which are not directly dealt with by the Sikh Holy Scriptures. One such issue is that of vegetarianism. Although a large number of baptised Sikhs are strict vegetarians and the food provided in gurdwaras is vegetarian, the only edict issued by any of the Gurus regarding diet was that by the 10th Guru (Guru Gobind Singh Ji) prohibiting the consumption of sacrificial meat (i.e. Halal or Kosher meat). Vegetarianism appears to be something which is of personal choice to Sikhs, and the provision of vegetarian food at the gurdwara is so that people can partake in it regardless of their dietary requirements. It is not something that was followed strictly by the Sikh Gurus, with some Gurus openly hunting animals or eating meat.[11]

It shouldn’t be deemed that the Gurus have overlooked issues which are not directly dealt with by the Sikh Holy Scriptures. Rather, the Gurus should be seen as having considered those issues as inconsequential and insignificant for the religion to give any guidance upon, and that it should therefore be a matter for personal interpretation. It is well documented that homosexuality existed in India at the time of the Gurus, and that there were well-known gay saints or religious men who were alive at the time of the Gurus and who were known to the Gurus.[12]

Sikhism is a democratic religion. One of its founding principles was the creation of a religion without a priesthood system and where followers would be able to seek guidance directly from their Guru, whether living or in the form of the Sikh Holy Scriptures, without the need of a third party to interpret those teachings. Sikhism therefore promotes a direct relationship between humans and God, with no intermediaries. The religion is one which believes in tolerance, equality and acceptance, and those appear to be qualities that followers of the religion sometimes lack when tackling contemporary issues.

Although the Akal Takht issued an edict prohibiting the practice of same-sex marriages in gurdwaras, the issue is far from dealt with in the west, and as can be seen above, not all such edicts are adhered to by Sikhs in the west or within India itself. Sikhism also allows for personal interpretation of the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib as there is no official priesthood system in place. 2009 will see the 100th anniversary of the Anand Karaj becoming legally recognised in India. Who knows how long it will be before same-sex marriages within Sikhism will become accepted rather than just theoretically possible?
_____________________________________
APPENDIX 1

ਸੰਤ ਜਨਾ ਵਡਭਾਗੀ ਪਾਇਆ ਹਰਿ ਕਥੀਐ ਅਕਥ ਕਹਾਣੀ ॥
sant janaa vadbhaagee paa-i-aa har kathee-ai akath kahaanee.
By great good fortune, I have found the humble Saints, and I speak the Unspoken Speech of the Lord.

Back to top
[1] http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050117/punjab1.htm#1
[2] http://www.sikhnet.com/s/AkalTakhatW
[3] See Appendix 1, the English Translation to the Lavaan
[4] http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/Products/Analytic/companion/rel/canada.cfm
[5] section 3 of the Civil Marriage Act 2005, which states that “It is recognized that officials of religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs”
[6] http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050117/punjab1.htm#1
[7] http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/01/18/martin-india.html
[8] section 377 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 states that “Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
[9] http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/sikh/blfaq_sikh_debate_chair.htm
[10] http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040725/punjab1.htm and http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/sikh/blfaq_sikh_debate_cal.htm
[11] http://www.sikhs.org/guru1.htm at paragraphs 14 and 15
[12] http://www.poetry-chaikhana.com/S/Sarmad/index.htm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmad and http://www.apnaorg.com/columns/majid/col2.html re the Saint Sarmad (a follower of Mian Mir, the Sufi Saint who laid the foundation stone of the Darbar Sahib or Golden Temple in Amritsar)